romad1 Posted June 29 Posted June 29 Also good Remember when Dershowitz was considered the gold standard for lawyers? Epstein? 1 Quote
romad1 Posted June 29 Posted June 29 so, here is the scorecard so far Watson - win Barbara is the birthright citizenship one. I assume Lisa Cook is the one about the Federal Reserve Board. Can anyone give me the skinny on Slaughter? Quote
pfife Posted June 29 Author Posted June 29 Cspan says they decided he can fire slaughter but cannot fire wood Quote
Sports_Freak Posted June 29 Posted June 29 What's going to happen to our economy when MAGA is in charge of the Federal Reserve and Trump instructs them to lower the interest rate? Quote
CMRivdogs Posted June 29 Posted June 29 Sotomayer going after Alito with both barrels blazing 2 1 Quote
CMRivdogs Posted June 29 Posted June 29 Keep in mind that back in the day there were no telegraphs, news was carried by horse back rider and final returns were not known until weeks after Election Day 1 Quote
romad1 Posted June 29 Posted June 29 8 minutes ago, guy incognito said: The briefs do not suggest #2 Quote
oblong Posted June 29 Posted June 29 54 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said: Keep in mind that back in the day there were no telegraphs, news was carried by horse back rider and final returns were not known until weeks after Election Day Doesn't his logic mean that absentee ballots cast before election day shouldn't count either? He says the choice be 'made on election day'. What then is the difference between before and after election day in his mind? 1 Quote
CMRivdogs Posted June 29 Posted June 29 8 minutes ago, oblong said: Doesn't his logic mean that absentee ballots cast before election day shouldn't count either? He says the choice be 'made on election day'. What then is the difference between before and after election day in his mind? Makes sense to me. I would assume that some would prefer that. Make voting difficult. That would give only the "right people" the chance to exercise that privilege . Pass laws closing everything but absolutely necessary institutions, Police, Fire, Hospitals. All businesses should close, expand the number of polling places..... Quote
CMRivdogs Posted June 29 Posted June 29 2 hours ago, oblong said: Doesn't his logic mean that absentee ballots cast before election day shouldn't count either? He says the choice be 'made on election day'. What then is the difference between before and after election day in his mind? I swear they want to go back to only letting male land owners are allowed suffrage. I keep waiting for Repuglikins to reinstitute the poll tax. Only this time will be awarded to those making a $$ million or more 1 Quote
oblong Posted June 29 Posted June 29 31 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said: I swear they want to go back to only letting male land owners are allowed suffrage. I keep waiting for Repuglikins to reinstitute the poll tax. Only this time will be awarded to those making a $$ million or more I had a friend in the 90's say that only people with a house should vote. I mentioned that he lives in a house "owned" by his mom but he pays the mortgage. "Yeah but that's different". There's always the exception which means white men. Quote
gehringer_2 Posted June 29 Posted June 29 (edited) 6 hours ago, CMRivdogs said: Keep in mind that back in the day there were no telegraphs, news was carried by horse back rider and final returns were not known until weeks after Election Day Prima facia stupidity from one of the "Learned of the Land". You can't even make it parse to anything that makes sense in the English language. Alito is another good reason GW should be in jail. What a country! Edited June 29 by gehringer_2 Quote
chasfh Posted June 29 Posted June 29 (edited) 7 hours ago, romad1 said: I can't imagine they vote against the 14th amendment. I was wondering about that. What if the Court simply declared the 14th amendment to be unconstitutional due to the procedural issue that the ex-Confederate states were bullied into adopting it as a condition of being readmitted into the union, and that by removing their votes from the equation that were made under obvious duress instead freely and willfully, the amendment falls well short of the three-fourths standard? Further to this point, what if the Supreme Court invalidated this or any other constitutional amendment as being unconstitutional simply because they voted at least 5-4 to do so? Technically they're not supposed to do that, but if they have the backing of the President, the apathy of the congressional majority, and several like-minded states rushing to implement policy based on the vote, who's going to stop them? Sounds like Alarmist Non-sense that could never, ever happen in a million years? OK, fine. Now tell us why. Edited June 29 by chasfh Quote
chasfh Posted June 29 Posted June 29 3 hours ago, CMRivdogs said: I swear they want to go back to only letting male land owners are allowed suffrage. I keep waiting for Repuglikins to reinstitute the poll tax. Only this time will be awarded to those making a $$ million or more They don't want even that, because that would require withstanding the uncertainty of a voting result that doesn't suit them. Quote
CMRivdogs Posted June 29 Posted June 29 One of the more interesting rulings concerning Trump is the court says he has to pay E Jean Carrol or at least they won't rule on the case. It's a smoke screen, the Conservatives are saying see we can still be objective. The court is giving tactical defeats but keeping the same Conservative strategy on strategic ones. While making him pay the civil case, they allow him to go beyond the norms in being able vto fire civil servants at will Quote
oblong Posted June 30 Posted June 30 13 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: Prima facia stupidity from one of the "Learned of the Land". You can't even make it parse to anything that makes sense in the English language. Alito is another good reason GW should be in jail. What a country! I was thinking yesterday about the chain of events that led to Alito. Remember they first nominated Harriet Miers. She was so bad that both parties did their actual duty and said she was unqualified. Then he nominated Roberts, but then Renquist died, so he withdrew that nominated and put Roberts in the Renquist slot, as O Conner wasn't retiring until a replacement was confirmed. So you switch O'Conner with Alito? Quote
buddha Posted June 30 Posted June 30 23 hours ago, guy incognito said: oh bluesky. never change. 6-3. i thought it would be 7-2 but gorsuch flipped. good job, chief! happy 250th america! Quote
romad1 Posted June 30 Posted June 30 The good news, my 97-year-old pop can stay in the United States! 1 Quote
romad1 Posted June 30 Posted June 30 Just now, romad1 said: The good news, my 97-year-old pop can stay in the United States! Despite Megan Kelly's angry wrath about him going back to Rotherhithe, London. Quote
buddha Posted June 30 Posted June 30 11 minutes ago, romad1 said: Only 6-3 tho... really 5-4 on the constitutional interpretation issue. kavanaugh said the EO violates congressional statute, but that the 14th amendment issue is unclear on whether it applies to all people born in the US. really 5 1/2 to 3 1/2. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.